2020
DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-35547/v2
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Perioperative patient-specific factors-based nomograms predict short-term periprosthetic bone loss after total hip arthroplasty

Abstract: Background: Although medical intervention of periprosthetic bone loss in the immediate postoperative period was recommended, not all the patients experienced periprosthetic bone loss after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Prediction tools that enrolled all potential risk factors to calculate an individualized prediction of postoperative periprosthetic bone loss were strongly needed for clinical decision-making. Methods: Data of the patients underwent primary unilateral cementless THA between April 2015 and Octobe… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(2 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
(54 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Candidate variables with a P value <0.1 after multivariable logistic analysis in the screening step were included in the nomogram. The relative importance of each predictor in the model was determined by subtracting the degrees of freedom from the Wald chi-square value (12). Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were also calculated for each variable.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Candidate variables with a P value <0.1 after multivariable logistic analysis in the screening step were included in the nomogram. The relative importance of each predictor in the model was determined by subtracting the degrees of freedom from the Wald chi-square value (12). Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were also calculated for each variable.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Referring to previous studies (13,14), we obtained predicted probabilities for the original sample based on each estimated model of bootstrap and concordance index (C-index) calculation. The bias-corrected C-index was defined as the average of these bootstrap C-indices, representing the ability to distinguish between patients who experience an event from those who do not (12). The C-index was measured on a scale of 0.5 (no better than chance) to 1 (perfect discrimination) (14).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%